The Duke of Sussex has lost his legal bid to challenge the level of security granted to him and his family while in the UK.
Prince Harry had attempted to overturn a decision that reduced his security following his departure from royal duties and relocation to the United States with the Duchess of Sussex.
His legal team argued that he was being unfairly treated, but the court found the process used to make the decision was lawful.
A senior judge ruled on Friday that Harry’s dissatisfaction with how the decision was made did not constitute a valid legal basis for appeal.
The dispute began after Harry and Meghan stepped down as senior royals in January 2020 and moved abroad.
Harry has previously stated that security concerns have prevented him from visiting the UK with his wife and children.
In this latest case, the prince argued that the government committee overseeing royal security had failed to properly consider his personal circumstances in 2020.
However, the Court of Appeal, comprising three senior judges, rejected his claim.
Sir Geoffrey Vos, the Master of the Rolls, acknowledged that Harry had presented heartfelt arguments and believed he had been mistreated.
However, he said that after reviewing the evidence, Harry’s grievances did not amount to a legal case against the committee’s decision.
The ruling means Harry will not receive the same automatic high-level security afforded to senior members of the Royal Family.
The court recognised that Harry’s change in status did not necessarily reduce the level of risk he faced.
Still, it concluded that there was no compelling reason to revisit the original security decision.
The origins of this legal battle trace back to Harry’s decision to step away from royal duties and relocate with his family.
Harry had challenged the process used by the committee known as Ravec—responsible for authorising royal protection—when handling his case.
Ravec had decided that, since Harry would no longer be a regular visitor to the UK, his security needs should be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
Harry’s legal team argued that this approach failed to adequately consider the threats he faced in 2020.
Although Harry continues to receive some police protection during UK visits, it must be arranged in advance—something he argued could compromise his family’s safety.
This court case focused on how Sir Richard Mottram, the Ravec chair at the time, reached the decision to reduce Harry’s protection.
A previous hearing found that Sir Richard was entitled to forgo a full reassessment of Harry’s security needs, even though the committee’s policy suggested one should have been conducted.
Sir Geoffrey acknowledged that the policy had not been followed but said the chair had valid reasons, grounded in his and the committee’s extensive experience in royal protection.
He described the decision to bypass the policy as “sensible” and not unreasonable under the circumstances.
